Skip to main content
Glama
AvYour

Figxel

by AvYour
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Create text

figma_create_text
Idempotent

Create text nodes in Figma frames with configurable content, font, alignment, width for wrapping, and auto-layout sizing.

Instructions

A text node, placed into a frame by parentId. Inside a vertical auto-layout it fills the column and wraps (and follows the column's centre/right alignment unless align is given); elsewhere give width for text that should wrap — text without one stays on a single line and can overflow. The font is loaded with the documented fallback chain; the result names the font used and flags fellBack: true when it is not the one requested. Editors: Design; unverified: FigJam, Slides.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xNo
yNo
nameNoLayer name, e.g. "Title". Default: the text itself.
alignNo
colorNoDefault #000000 (in FigJam: #1E1E1E, the board's own text colour).
widthNoFixed width in px; the text wraps inside it.
sizingNoHow it sizes, as in Figma's panel: { "horizontal": "fill" } to take the parent column's width; "hug" fits content; "fixed" keeps the number.
weightNoDefault Regular (in FigJam: Medium, the board's own default).
contentYesThe text. Newlines are allowed.
sessionNoOptional sessionId or file name, to pick a Figma file when more than one is connected.
fontSizeNo
parentIdNoDefaults to the current page (in Slides: the focused slide).
fontFamilyNoDefault Inter.
lineHeightNo"auto", px ("24" or "24px") or percent ("150%"), as in figma_set_text_properties; above 0. A unitless value is px, never a multiplier.
letterSpacingNopx ("0.5") or percent ("-1%"), as in figma_set_text_properties. A unitless value is px.
idempotencyKeyNoCaller-owned retry key, ≤128 chars. Re-calling with the same key never executes twice: it returns the existing result, or waits for the op still in flight. Supply your own for anything large — if the MCP client times out (rather than the bridge), only a key you chose can be used to retry safely.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true and destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered. On top of that the description discloses non-obvious behavior: the font fallback chain, a `fellBack: true` flag in the result, overflow behavior for unwrapped text, and editor support ('Design; unverified: FigJam, Slides'). That is meaningful added context beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences that are front-loaded with the placement rule and each carry distinct information. It is on the longer side but virtually every clause earns its place (layout, wrapping, font fallback, editor coverage).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 16-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and nested objects, the description covers the interlocking layout/sizing behaviors and even describes the returned font/`fellBack` signal. Remaining gaps (defaults for many parameters) are handled by the schema's own descriptions, so it is close to complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 75%, so the schema carries most of the burden, but the description adds semantics for the trickiest parameters: how `parentId` places the node, how `align` is inherited from the parent column, how `width` triggers wrapping, and how the font is resolved. This goes beyond restating the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description makes clear it produces a text node and how it is placed ('placed into a frame by `parentId`'), which is a specific resource plus behavior. It stops short of differentiating itself from near siblings such as figma_create_shapes_with_text or figma_set_text, so the agent must infer which to pick.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives real usage context for the layout parameters — 'Inside a vertical auto-layout it fills the column', 'elsewhere give `width` for text that should wrap' — which tells an agent how to obtain the desired result. However, there is no when-to-use-this-tool-vs-alternatives guidance relative to the many text-related siblings, so routing is only implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools